Disney-Pixar Studios

[chigirl]

My SIL says that MGM will be renamed "Disney-Pixar Studios" by mid-2007 to reflect the status of Pixar in the Disney family. Anyone else hear this? She has a friend who is a manager at WDW and his information is usually accurate, that is who told her. Seems to make sense to me.

 

[MJMcBride]

haven't heard that one. They've been dropping the MGM part for years. Who knows.

 

[Becky_Boop]

I read in my Passporter that the contract with MGM is ending soon, but will most likely be renamed "Walt Disney Studios" or "Disney Studios".

I'm somewhat worried about the second one, though. If they name MGM Disney Studios, what will we use for an abbreviation?

 

[2Xited4Disney]

I'm somewhat worried about the second one, though. If they name MGM Disney Studios, what will we use for an abbreviation?

DS like DS paris

 

[vonpluto]

Jim Hill has a piece about this today.

 

[DizParks]

It doesn't make any sense to name it Disney-Pixar Studios, because Disney owns Pixar. That's like saying they're going to name it The Disney-Pixar-Miramax-Touchstone-ABC-ESPN Studios

 

[MJMcBride]

It doesn't make any sense to name it Disney-Pixar Studios, because Disney owns Pixar. That's like saying they're going to name it The Disney-Pixar-Miramax-Touchstone-ABC-ESPN Studios

I like it. Maybe it will be DATMEP Studios and after years eventually it will just be Datmep.

 

[dbm20th]

It doesn't make any sense to name it Disney-Pixar Studios, because Disney owns Pixar. That's like saying they're going to name it The Disney-Pixar-Miramax-Touchstone-ABC-ESPN Studios

Why not?

 

[jeanylaser]

Disney/Pixar studios is be a great name. i hope the incredibles show will replace the indy stunt show.

 

[BuzzBelleMom]

Disney/Pixar studios is be a great name. i hope the incredibles show will replace the indy stunt show.

If they do that, DS will want to move to Florida.

 

[Razor Roman]

I understand why they'd want to name it Disney-Pixar Studios, it gives some awesome marketing potential, but it kind of kills the "Classic Hollywood" theme. MGM gave it that classy touch, splashy musicals and all that stuff, it sort of screamed "40's Hollywood". The Walt Disney Studios would still work with the classic theme (albeit less star studded - when I think of Disney I don't think of Garbo, Bogart, etc, I think of cartoons, Fred MacMurray, and Annette Funicello).

The Pixar name makes me think of great animation, but it doesn't make me think of Hollywood - heck Pixar is almost as far removed from Hollywood physically as the "Black Mariah" is here in Edison, New Jersey!

 

[Sarangel]

but it kind of kills the "Classic Hollywood" theme.

I think they went a long way in that direction when they installed the BAH (Big * Hat) in front of the Chinese Theatre.

 

[Razor Roman]

I think they went a long way in that direction when they installed the BAH (Big * Hat) in front of the Chinese Theatre.

I agree. Unfortunately it seems to me like the "average" visitor doesn't even get the theming of the park (or any of the parks). When I worked there, do you know how many people asked me what type of ride was in "Mulan's Castle"

 

[Disneybag]

I think we'll see a major overhaul on the Great Movie Ride. I can only assume they'll be jerking all of the MGM films and replacing with Touchstone, etc. Move over Gene Kelley. Here comes Tom Hanks in Splash! Ugh.

 

[BuzzBelleMom]

I agree. Unfortunately it seems to me like the "average" visitor doesn't even get the theming of the park (or any of the parks). When I worked there, do you know how many people asked me what type of ride was in "Mulan's Castle"

Mulan's Castle? I want to believe you are joking, but when we went last time, one of the cast members asked someone to name all six Disney Princesses.....and someone said Fiona.

 

[MainStMandy]

I agree that they should try and keep the classic hollywood themeing, but keep in mind that with the loss of the name MGM comes the loss of all that classic movie history...So def a overhauling of GMR, the ride has awesome potential during a major rehab, but with the focus now on the hat and the loss of the rights to MGM, we would lose the Chinese Theatre as well...

 

[DancingBear]

Re the loss of MGM, one of the thoughts has been that MGM might not really mind re-upping with Disney--since their Vegas park was a bust, did they really need to take back the license to use MGM films in a theme park environment? But now it appears that MGM is at least somewhat pursuing a theme park in Korea:

http://www.thinkwelldesign.com/what_we_do/master_mgm.html

Of course, this may just be a licensed venture. Anyone know anything more about this?

 

[Another Voice]

MGM is in a muddle these days. The company was recently purchased by a large investment group that included some private individuals and a good chunk of change from Sony (owner of Sony Pictures, Columbia and Tristar). It's unclear who's actually running the show at the moment or if anyone is running the show.

The was a big deal press release a while about by one of the management, including all sorts of news about making The Hobbit into to movies, further James Bond movies, sequels to Stargate and other attempts at launching some tentpole properties. Nothings been announced since and it seems to have been a ploy to raise some capital money. In the case of The Hobbit, Peter Jackson was taken completely by surprise and has spent the last few weeks waiting by his telephone - only to hear nothing. And Sony has been very quiet about it's plans as well.

So I would think that if MGM can't get its act together on the movie side than that probably means no one is paying any attention to trival stuff like theme parks.

The name that gets slapped onto the park at WDW is really up to Disney, and then it's only for marketing purposes. There's no production going on there any more and even The Walt Disney Studios can't bothered with it. All things considered, Disney would probably leave the name the same. If they have to change, we're more likely to see Disney/ABC Studios than anything else for the simple reason that Disney needs to promote ABC a lot more than they need to promote Pixar.

 

[Horace Horsecollar]

Re the loss of MGM, one of the thoughts has been that MGM might not really mind re-upping with Disney--since their Vegas park was a bust, did they really need to take back the license to use MGM films in a theme park environment?

MGM MIRAGE (the company with the casinos in Las Vegas and other cities) and Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc. (the movie company MGM) are completely different companies. If you want to know more about how this happened, do a Google search on Kirk Kerkorian. MGM MIRAGE and MGM both use Leo the Lion as part of their logo.

The failed MGM Grand Adventures Theme Park in Las Vegas was built by MGM Grand (which became MGM MIRAGE after buying Steve Wynn's Mirage Resorts.

Disney licensed the MGM name from MGM/UA (which is now Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc. or MGM for short) for its Disney-MGM Studios in the late 1980s for a relatively modest fee.

I realize that Michael Eisner wanted wanted MGM as part of the name of Disney's Florida movie theme park because he thought the Disney name didn't have enough credibility as a movie studio. I really don't understand why The Walt Disney Company still wants MGM as part of the name of the studio theme park in Florida. Much of the public believes that MGM is somehow connected with the park, and all that does is to promote MGM and give MGM credit for something good, erroneously.

I've been reading rumors for a decade that the removal of MGM from the park's name is imminent, but it hasn't happened yet. At this point, I won't believe any rumors along these lines until I observe the change actually happening.

 

[MJMcBride]

the simple reason that Disney needs to promote ABC a lot more than they need to promote Pixar.

so when are we getting a Lost ride?